the rationale of print pricing - is there one.

[Brian Ellis]

Sure, there's several rationales. Buyers will generally pay more for a large print than an otherwise identical small print. Materials, lab costs, mailing costs, etc. are more for a large prints than a smaller one. And since almost everyone charges more for a large print why would someone do any differently to their disadvantage? Those may or make sense to you but I think those are the rationales.

[Charles Carstensen]

Large prints are more impressive to the viewer. Large prints cost more to create, deliver by the artist. The skill level necessary to create a larger print is greater (IMHO). Large prints take up more wall space.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

So can someone explain why it is that a print which is made at 16x20 should be priced at say $400 and one made at 8x10 should be priced at $200.
Fact is they both take about the same amount of man hours to make and difference in material cost is maybe $5 if matting is included and the same negative was used to make both. What would be the justification in making such a big price differentiation between the two sizes? It just seems to be taking the **** out of any potential buyer if they think about it.

If you're selling a 16x20 for $400, I think you're asking the wrong question, unless you don't limit your editions.

The biggest turn off to people who are buying is something that's priced too low. You can always negotiate down - you can never negotiate up. If you saw a Lexus sitting in a new car showroom for $5,000, brand new, all the trimmings, you would run away pretty fast. The same should be thought about for your photography - it's a luxury item (if you don't want to consider it one - you should), and it has to be priced accordingly. Limit your editions to 25 or less per size and anything over an 8x10 sell for at least $1000. Hypothetical scenario: Somebody says to you "That's too expensive, I'll give you $800" when you were considering selling it for $400, you know you've made the right decision.

[QT Luong]

anything over an 8x10 sell for at least $1000.

One needs to have the bio to justify those prices. Not a good advice for emerging photographers in my opinion. Overpricing is often done in an attempt to make the work look more important than it really is. Serious buyers know better.

[percepts]

If you're selling a 16x20 for $400, I think you're asking the wrong question, unless you don't limit your editions.

The biggest turn off to people who are buying is something that's priced too low. You can always negotiate down - you can never negotiate up. If you saw a Lexus sitting in a new car showroom for $5,000, brand new, all the trimmings, you would run away pretty fast. The same should be thought about for your photography - it's a luxury item (if you don't want to consider it one - you should), and it has to be priced accordingly. Limit your editions to 25 or less per size and anything over an 8x10 sell for at least $1000. Hypothetical scenario: Somebody says to you "That's too expensive, I'll give you $800" when you were considering selling it for $400, you know you've made the right decision.

Unfortunately you haven't a clue what my images are worth because you have never seen one in the flesh so are not qualified to comment on what price they should be. Besides that wasn't the question which was asking for the rationale between relative pricing of different print sizes from the same negative and not absolute pricing.

[Daniel Grenier]

.... If you saw a Lexus sitting in a new car showroom for $5,000, brand new, all the trimmings, you would run away pretty fast......

Are you kidding? A Lexus at $5,000? I'd buy the thing right on the spot. Same for a $100 Ansel Adams !

The car price analogy can be applied to FA Photography. For instance, I have bought 8x10 contact prints for $40 and other 8x10s from better known artists for $1500. You are buying experience, supporting a body of work, a vision, a commitment to craft and medium. Joe new face asking $1000 for an 8x10 would be exactly like Hyundai asking $75,000 for their cars. There's no way in hell I'd buy a $75,000 Hyundai OR a $1000 8x10 from some unknown wannabe (no reference to OP is implied, thanks). I would, however, pay a couple thousands to a REAL Artist's work just like I'd pay serious money for a "real" car.

As for the original question, print pricing does have to do with sheer size IMO. Yes, size matters in this business. It's a male appendage issue thinggy built in our genes, I guess.

[Mark Sawyer]

The biggest turn off to people who are buying is something that's priced too low. You can always negotiate down - you can never negotiate up.

This raised an eye-brow. I've always heard the rule was "never negotiate and never lower your prices, as it's unfair to thers who've bought your work". And of course, if a gallery is involved, they have their own concerns in pricing...

But David is much more in tune with these things than I. So, begging the forum's pardon for going a little OT, are an artist's prices negotiable?

[Mike Putnam]

I believe Charles is on the money in that there are complexities, especially with large framed prints which justify a higher price. Also, I don't think you should underestimate the "Wow" factor of a large nicely done print. One more thing! In some markets(mine is included) larger prints eliminate many of the "I could have taken that picture" perceptions from the minds of potential buyers whereas smaller prints are less likely to give the perception that the artist must be a Professional. This is not to say that I think all images are better at a bigger size, because I don't think they are. I do , however, believe that perception of value is critical, if you want to make money.
Mike
Mike Putnam Photography
Pacific Crest Stock Photography

[QT Luong]

are an artist's prices negotiable?

Heard this year from Charlotte Cotton (head of photography at LACMA) talking to collectors: in this economy, gallery are not going to change the sticker prices, but they are going to be much more flexible.

[Frank Petronio]

I think you end up charging plus or minus within 20% or so of what your peers in the same market are getting, whether it's a county craft show or a world-class gallery.

Frankly if you offer the same photo in different sizes, it puts you in the lower end of the art market and you take what you can get. If you were in the truly high end, your piece would be a one-of-kind -- you don't see Jock Sturges or one of those Germans (Gursky, etc.) giving collectors a choice of sizes and mat colors....